Israel Shouldn’t get a free pass real debate is not anti-Semitic by Jonathan Tasini

[Darius11 12]

Quote

Israel Shouldn’t get a free pass real debate is not anti-Semitic by Jonathan Tasini

Why can’t American Jews, particularly liberal Jews think straight about Israel? American Jews can easily condemn the war in and occupation of Iraq, as well as the death of hundreds of thousands of civilians and the violations of civil rights there. Yet the same passion for peace, justice and human rights is muted when it comes to the Israeli government.

American Jews and many politicians who pander for Jewish votes are hurting Israel and the cause of peace by refusing to have an honest debate about our country’s historically one-sided position vis-à-vis and the Middle East conflict. An honest debate is under way in Israel itself, but in the US it’s impossible to be critical of Israel without being labeled anti-Semitic or worst.

Before I dice further into this, I should establish my bona fides fir making this argument, which in it self says a lot about the terrain. I am a Jew. My father was born in what was then Palestine and fought in Israel’s war of independence. My father’s cousin was killed in that war. I lived in Israel for seven years, including the periods of 1973 yom kippur war. A cousin of mine was killed in that war leaving a young widow and two children.

My step-grandfather, an old man who was no threat to anyone, was killed by a Palestinian who took an ax to his head while he was sitting quietly on a park bench. His murder was revenge for the massacre of dozens of peaceful Muslims the day before, slaughtered by an ultranationalist Israeli settler as they knelt in prayer.


I care about Israel, as I care about our country, but I wish to speak the truth about it.
In 2006, when I ran in the New York Democratic Party for senator because of incumbent Hillary Clinton’s support for the Iraq war, my campaign coincided with Israel’s bombing of Lebanon, a move triggered by the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers. While campaigning I said the Israeli military had committed acts that violated the Geneva Convention and international standards. Within an hour reports from all four New York daily papers called me, alerted to my comments by my opponent’s operatives. Betraying their bias, the reporters had no idea my position would not be considered novel or radical in Israel, where the country’s conduct in the war was topic of hot debate.

Indeed, the reporters need only have consulted Israeli human rights organization B’Tselem. Referring to last summer’s Lebanon bombing. B’Tselem’s website states, “international humanitarian law…requires that the combating sides direct their attacks only against specific military objectives, take cautionary measures to prevent injury to civilians refrain from disproportionate attack, i.e., attacks directed against legitimate targets but that are likely to cause excessive harm to civilians. Over the past week Israel has killed hundreds of Lebanese civilians in its attacks against targets in Lebanon. There is a concern that at least some of them were disproportionate attacks, which constitute war crimes.”

Here are some other inconvenient truths. Israel is holding 1000 Palestinians in administrative detention, where, according to B’Tselem, they are exposed to “moderate pressure,” a euphemism for torture. And while six Israeli solders and 17 civilians died last year , the Israeli military killed 660 Palestinians, roughly half of them innocent bystanders.

So why is there such a lack of debate in the U.S.? Jews and Non-Jews who can easily tell foreigners that being American is not the same as supporting the American government are incapable of making the same argument in Israel’s case. Elected officials won’t say anything because of the political cost or at least the perceived threat from Jewish voters. And there is residue from the cold war, when Israel was seen as the region’s bulwark against the Soviet Union.

Among Jews there is a reflexive “Israel, right or wrong” Attitude that is deeply rooted in the memory of the Holocaust. My own family lost people in the Holocaust. Nut the Holocaust should not be used as a moral shield to suppress honest criticism of Israel.
It is also important to acknowledge that some critics of Israel undercut their own positions by painting a caricature of the country. Israel is a democracy, and like all democracies it has flaws. But the open debate heard in Israel is rarely heard in the region’s other countries, most of which are ruled by dictators or generals.

Israel has a very free and rambunctious press; Israel’s attorney general recently went after the country’s president for sexual harassment. We can’t even get Congress, not to mention the attorney general, to investigate the president for lying about the war. These facts make Israel’s conduct even more troubling: The country’s democratic principles and social fabric are being undermined by its role as an occupier.

People who refuse to criticize Israel because of friendship are no friends of Israel. A true friend would not have stood by and remained silent as Israel dropped thousands of cluster bombs on Lebanon, leaving a million unexploded bomblets-small devices the size of a light socket that are still killing and injuring civilians-littered throughout the southern part of the country. A true friend would have taken Israel’s leaders to the woodshed and said “ responding to Hezbollah is one thing, but turning Lebanon into rubble and embittering a new generation towards the existence of your country is madness.” Instead, politicians like senators Joe Lieberman and Clinton actually encouraged the bombing by uttering vigorous endorsements of Israel’s right to defend it self. A friend of Israel would not try to fan fears by tarring as anti-Semitic people wh0o are critical of U.S. Middle East policy. Criticism of Israel may be painful to American Jews, but it is high time anyone Jew or non-Jew, were able to raise the questions about our one-sided policy without fear of a McCarthy-like smear. A friend would argue strenuously that Israel’s moral fiber and security are weakened every moment it allows the So-called separation barrier in the West Bank to stand, in Violation of international law.

Whether Jews like the comparison or not Jimmy Carter is correct in his book Palestine: Peace not Apartheid when he describes the control over Palestinian’s movements as similar to South Africa’s apartheid system.
As a Jew, I have always been proud of the Jewish concept of tikkun olam, which means roughly “repairing the world.” I like to think it is what brought so many Jews into civil rights and labor movement in the 1960s and 1970s and into the current antiwar movement. I feel great sorrow that Israel is an occupier of another people, and I believe Israel can never be whole or at peace until the occupation is ended in a just way. I also believe tikkun olam means we must never be silent.

This is an article in 10/2007 Playboy. I can not find a link on the web so I typed it word for word for all of you to read. This is a great article, which explains the hypocrisy that we see often when it comes to this issue.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Amazon 7]

So ok.. we get it you hate Israel...

WE have a new SC poster with a whole new country..instead of England and GUNS and crime..

Please be sure to set up some web crawlers to find any mention of Israel and evil.

[Darius11 12]

This artical was in Playboy 10/2007.

Did you even read it?

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

This artical was in Playboy 10/2007.

Did you even read it?

I tried, but the formatting made it very painful. It's difficult for humans to read a paragraph that is nearly a full screen.

[Darius11 12]

i hope this helps.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[Amazon 7]

Uh Plyaboy is not on my reading list....

I guess you did not have a subsription to that in Iran now did you.

[Darius11 12]

It's my GFs belive it or not she likes the articals.

Quote

I guess you did not have a subsription to that in Iran now did you.

no i did not as i don;t now. It doesn;t do anything for me. I like a little more left to the imagination.

I'd rather be hated for who I am, than loved for who I am not." - Kurt Cobain

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Uh Plyaboy is not on my reading list....

I guess you did not have a subsription to that in Iran now did you.

don't they chop off your hands (or another central limb) for reading that?

Darius, there's nothing earth shattering about the article. It's obvious that Israel shouldn't get a free pass, and it's not anti semitic to criticize actions they take.

It's merely hypocritical to hold them to a higher standard than their enemies, and it's naive to expect a regional power to take shit from the lesser powers around it without exerting major payback.

In my younger days I had a harsher view of Israel, but as the 90s rolled on and we got to 2001, it was obvious that 'turn the other cheek' works as well for us as it did for Jesus. There are finite resources on the planet and everyone will always want more, and force decides who wins.

[falxori 0]

Quote

no i did not as i don;t now. It doesn;t do anything for me. I like a little more left to the imagination.

I would have suggested Playgirl maybe, but i just remembered Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said there are no Gay people in Iran, and we all know he's always telling the truth...

anyway, back to the topic, the fact that the author is jewish doesn't make his claims more or less valid. its his views and he is free the hold them. the beauty of free speech...

O

"Carpe diem, quam minimum credula postero."

[NCclimber 0]

Yesterday, you were complaining about an article titled "Syria fires on Israeli Planes". You were complaining about it's misleading nature.

Here, you post an article, of which the title basically says anyone critically of Israeli policy is automatically labelled an anti-Semite.

Also, here's a recent post of your's:

Quote

I have noticed a fundamental difference between the people I agree with and the people I disagree with.

The people I agree with (for the most part) usually tend to apply the same rule and same standards to all humans and the people I disagree with tend to apply different standards depending on the sense of camaraderie they feel to the subject or persons being discussed.

That is hypocrisy and this thread is just to point that out to all of you.

Do unto others...